Covid Vaccines Drop Below Zero Efficacy & Not Durable at 200 Days

Sweden vaccine durability study chart

A Sweeden study shows covid vaccines drop below zero efficacy on spread by about 200 days.  Is this why Pfizer eliminated clinical trial control groups after 90 days?

The swedes just did a large vaccine study using 842,972 pairs of people (1.7 million total). each pair had one vaxxed, one unvaxxed. it’s currently a preprint for “the lancet.” you can grab it HERE.

This was a retrospective study, but one in which the matching of cohorts was pretty good which improves the evidence quality quite a bit. it’s not a full RCT, but it’s a lot better than most of what’s getting published right now.

Age was about the same, comorbidities similar, and gender near exact. the only major variance seems to be that 10% of vaxxed vs 4% of unvaxxed were “homemaker service” which looks to be the high risk “assisted living” group. also, 84% of vaxxed were born in sweden vs 69% of unvaxxed. given the higher covid rates in immigrants, this seems to favor vaccines. so too does the usual definitional game of only counting those who are 14 days or more after a second dose as vaccinated.

Vaccines start off reasonably effective, but they fade very quickly. this has long been a criticism and a complaint about the shortness of the drug trials on which their approval was based and the elimination of their control groups to prevent long term study.

Companies like pfizer are VERY good at clinical trials. They do not make mistakes. They make choices.

Given these longer term results, it seems clear why they chose to run short trials and then eliminate the control groups after about 90 days. because that’s when things start to go off the rails. This becomes obvious in the curves from the study:

The downslope in efficacy against symptomatic infection is just starting right where pfizer and moderna ended their trials and vaccinated the control groups to make future comparison impossible. (red vertical line added by me) out around 240 days (red horiz line added by me) it goes negative.

Note that this is symptomatic only data, not “any found infection.” the fact that the VE is (despite being negative) is still far higher than negative VE’s seen in “all cases” in the UK interests me. this may imply a large group of vaccinated asymptomatic carriers.

It also raises questions about whether the vaccines ever provide ANY sterilizing immunity at all or if they merely prevent symptoms. recall that both the mRNA drug trials only tested those reporting symptoms for covid to assess efficacy.  Again, seems like a choice, not an error.

But this is all well known. the evidence that vaccines fail to stop spread has been clear for some time and not even the CDC argues it anymore.

What this study added that was terribly interesting was data on the prevention of severe covid. and this too drops rapidly.

Read the full story here.

Vaccinating people who have had covid-19: why doesn’t natural immunity count in the US?

natural immunity ignored

The substantial number of infections, coupled with the increasing scientific evidence that natural immunity is durable, led some medical observers to ask why natural immunity didn’t seem to be factored into decisions about prioritizing vaccination.

“The CDC could say [to people who had recovered], very well-grounded in excellent data, that you should wait 8 months,” Monica Gandhi, an infectious disease specialist at University of California San Francisco, told Medpage Today in January. She suggested authorities ask people to “please wait your turn.”

Others, such as Icahn School of Medicine virologist and researcher Florian Krammer, argued for one dose in those who had recovered. “This would also spare individuals from unnecessary pain when getting the second dose and it would free up additional vaccine doses,” he told the New York Times.5

“Many of us were saying let’s use [the vaccine] to save lives, not to vaccinate people already immune,” says Marty Makary, a professor of health policy and management at Johns Hopkins University.

Still, the CDC instructed everyone, regardless of previous infection, to get fully vaccinated as soon as they were eligible: natural immunity “varies from person to person” and “experts do not yet know how long someone is protected,” the agency stated on its website in January.6 By June, a Kaiser Family Foundation survey found that 57% of those previously infected got vaccinated.

As more US employers, local governments, and educational institutions issue vaccine mandates that make no exception for those who have had covid-19,8 questions remain about the science and ethics of treating this group of people as equally vulnerable to the virus—or as equally threatening to those vulnerable to covid-19—and to what extent politics has played a role.

The evidence

“Starting from back in November, we’ve had a lot of really important studies that showed us that memory B cells and memory T cells were forming in response to natural infection,” says Gandhi. Studies are also showing, she says, that these memory cells will respond by producing antibodies to the variants at hand.

Gandhi included a list of some 20 references on natural immunity to covid in a long Twitter thread supporting the durability of both vaccine and infection induced immunity.12 “I stopped adding papers to it in December because it was getting so long,” she tells The BMJ.

But the studies kept coming. A National Institutes of Health (NIH) funded study from La Jolla Institute for Immunology found “durable immune responses” in 95% of the 200 participants up to eight months after infection.13 One of the largest studies to date, published in Science in February 2021, found that although antibodies declined over 8 months, memory B cells increased over time, and the half life of memory CD8+ and CD4+ T cells suggests a steady presence.

Real world data have also been supportive.14 Several studies (in Qatar,15 England,16 Israel,17 and the US18) have found infection rates at equally low levels among people who are fully vaccinated and those who have previously had covid-19. Cleveland Clinic surveyed its more than 50 000 employees to compare four groups based on history of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination status.18 Not one of over 1300 unvaccinated employees who had been previously infected tested positive during the five months of the study. Researchers concluded that that cohort “are unlikely to benefit from covid-19 vaccination.” In Israel, researchers accessed a database of the entire population to compare the efficacy of vaccination with previous infection and found nearly identical numbers. “Our results question the need to vaccinate previously infected individuals,” they concluded.

As covid cases surged in Israel this summer, the Ministry of Health reported the numbers by immunity status. Between 5 July and 3 August, just 1% of weekly new cases were in people who had previously had covid-19. Given that 6% of the population are previously infected and unvaccinated, “these numbers look very low,” says Dvir Aran, a biomedical data scientist at the Technion–Israel Institute of Technology, who has been analysing Israeli data on vaccine effectiveness and provided weekly ministry reports to The BMJ. While Aran is cautious about drawing definitive conclusions, he acknowledged “the data suggest that the recovered have better protection than people who were vaccinated.”

But as the delta variant and rising case counts have the US on edge, renewed vaccination incentives and mandates apply regardless of infection history.8 To attend Harvard University or a Foo Fighters concert or enter indoor venues in San Francisco and New York City, you need proof of vaccination. The ire being directed at people who are unvaccinated is also indiscriminate—and emanating from America’s highest office. In a recent speech to federal intelligence employees who, along with all federal workers, will be required to get vaccinated or submit to regular testing, President Biden left no room for those questioning the public health necessity or personal benefit of vaccinating people who have had covid-19: “We have a pandemic because of the unvaccinated ... So, get vaccinated. If you haven’t, you’re not nearly as smart as I said you were.”

Staying firm

Other countries do give past infection some immunological currency. Israel recommends that people who have had covid-19 wait three months before getting one mRNA vaccine dose and offers a “green pass” (vaccine passport) to those with a positive serological result regardless of vaccination.19 In the European Union, people are eligible for an EU digital covid certificate after a single dose of an mRNA vaccine if they have had a positive test result within the past six months, allowing travel between 27 EU member states.20 In the UK, people with a positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test result can obtain the NHS covid pass up until 180 days after infection.

Although it’s too soon to say whether these systems are working smoothly or mitigating spread, the US has no category for people who have been infected. The CDC still recommends a full vaccination dose for all, which is now being mirrored in mandates. A spokesperson told The BMJ that “the immune response from vaccination is more predictable” and that based on current evidence, antibody responses after infection “vary widely by individual,” though studies are ongoing to “learn how much protection antibodies from infection may provide and how long that protection lasts.”

In June, Peter Marks, director of the Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, which regulates vaccines, went a step further and stated: “We do know that the immunity after vaccination is better than the immunity after natural infection.” In an email, an FDA spokesperson said Marks’s comment was based on a laboratory study of the binding breadth of Moderna vaccine induced antibodies.22 The research did not measure any clinical outcomes. Marks added, referring to antibodies, that “generally the immunity after natural infection tends to wane after about 90 days.”

“It appears from the literature that natural infection provides immunity, but that immunity is seemingly not as strong and may not be as long lasting as that provided by the vaccine,” Alfred Sommer, dean emeritus of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health tells The BMJ.

But not everyone agrees with this interpretation. “The data we have right now suggests that there probably isn’t a whole lot of difference” in terms of immunity to the spike protein, says Matthew Memoli, director of the Laboratory of Infectious Diseases Clinical Studies at the NIH, who spoke to The BMJ in a personal capacity.

Memoli highlights real world data such as the Cleveland Clinic study18 and points out that while “vaccines are focused on only that tiny portion of immunity that can be induced” by the spike, someone who has had covid-19 was exposed to the whole virus, “which would likely offer a broader based immunity” that would be more protective against variants. The laboratory study offered by the FDA22 “only has to do with very specific antibodies to a very specific region of the virus [the spike],” says Memoli. “Claiming this as data supporting that vaccines are better than natural immunity is shortsighted and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the complexity of immunity to respiratory viruses.”


Much of the debate pivots on the importance of sustained antibody protection. In April, Anthony Fauci told US radio host Maria Hinajosa that people who have had covid-19 (including Hinajosa) still need to be “boosted” by vaccination because “your antibodies will go sky high.”

“That’s still what we’re hearing from Dr Fauci—he’s a strong believer that higher antibody titres are going to be more protective against the variants,” says Jeffrey Klausner, a clinical professor of preventive medicine at the University of Southern California and former CDC medical officer, who has spoken out in favour of treating prior infection as equivalent to vaccination, with “the same societal status.”3 Klausner conducted a systematic review of 10 studies on reinfection and concluded that the “protective effect” of a previous infection “is high and similar to the protective effect of vaccination.”

In vaccine trials, antibodies are higher in participants who were seropositive at baseline than in those who were seronegative.24 However, Memoli questions the importance: “We don’t know that that means it’s better protection.”

Former CDC director Tom Frieden, a proponent of universal vaccination, echoes that uncertainty: “We don’t know that antibody level is what determines protection.”

Gandhi and others have been urging reporters away from antibodies as the defining metric of immunity. “It is accurate that your antibodies will go down” after natural infection, she says—that’s how the immune system works. If antibodies didn’t clear from our bloodstream after we recover from a respiratory infection, “our blood would be thick as molasses.”

“The real memory in our immune system resides in the [T and B] cells, not in the antibodies themselves,” says Patrick Whelan, a paediatric rheumatologist at University of California, Los Angeles. He points out that his sickest covid-19 patients in intensive care, including children with multisystem inflammatory syndrome, have “had loads of antibodies ... So the question is, why didn’t they protect them?”

Antonio Bertoletti, a professor of infectious disease at Duke-NUS Medical School in Singapore, has conducted research that indicates T cells may be more important than antibodies. Comparing the T cell response in people with symptomatic versus asymptomatic covid-19, Bertoletti’s team found them to be identical, suggesting that the severity of infection does not predict strength of resulting immunity and that people with asymptomatic infections “mount a highly functional virus specific cellular immune response.”25

Already complicated rollout

While some argue that the pandemic strategy should not be “one size fits all,” and that natural immunity should count, other public health experts say universal vaccination is a more quantifiable, predictable, reliable, and feasible way to protect the population.

Frieden told The BMJ that the question of leveraging natural immunity is a “reasonable discussion,” one he had raised informally with the CDC at start of rollout. “I thought from a rational standpoint, with limited vaccine available, why don’t you have the option” for people with previous infection to defer until there was more supply, he says. “I think that would have been a rational policy. It would have also made rollout, which was already too complicated, even more complicated.”

Most infections were never diagnosed, Frieden points out, and many people may have assumed they had been infected when they hadn’t. Add to that false positive results, he says. Had the CDC given different directives and vaccine schedules based on prior infection, it “wouldn’t have done much good and might have done some harm.”

Klausner, who is also a medical director of a US testing and vaccine distribution company, says he initiated conversations about offering a fingerprick antibody screen for people with suspected exposure before vaccination, so that doses could be used more judiciously. But “everyone concluded it was just too complicated.”

“It’s a lot easier to put a shot in their arm,” says Sommer. “To do a PCR test or to do an antibody test and then to process it and then to get the information to them and then to let them think about it—it’s a lot easier to just give them the damn vaccine.” In public health, “the primary objective is to protect as many people as you can,” he says. “It’s called collective insurance, and I think it’s irresponsible from a public health perspective to let people pick and choose what they want to do.”

But Klausner, Gandhi, and others raise the question of fairness for the millions of Americans who already have records of positive covid test results—the basis for “recovered” status in Europe—and equity for those at risk who are waiting to get their first dose (an argument being raised anew as US officials announce boosters while the virus spreads in countries lacking vaccine supply). For people who did not have a confirmed positive result but suspected previous infection, reliable antibody tests have been accessible “at least since April,” according to Klausner, though in May, the FDA announced that “antibody tests should not be used to evaluate a person’s level of immunity or protection from covid-19 at any time.”

Unlike Europe, the US doesn’t have a national certificate or vaccination requirement, so defenders of natural immunity have simply advocated for more targeted recommendations and screening availability—and that mandates allow for exemptions. Logistics aside, a recognition of existing immunity would have fundamentally changed the target vaccination calculations and would also affect the calculations on boosters. “As we continued to put effort into vaccination and set targets, it became apparent to me that people were forgetting that herd immunity is formed by both natural immunity and vaccine immunity,” says Klausner.

Gandhi thinks logistics is only part of the story. “There’s a very clear message out there that ‘OK, well natural infection does cause immunity but it’s still better to get vaccinated,’ and that message is not based on data,” says Gandhi. “There’s something political going on around that.”

Politics of natural immunity

Early in the pandemic, the question of natural immunity was on the mind of Ezekiel Emanuel, a bioethicist at the University of Pennsylvania and senior fellow at the liberal think tank Center for American Progress, who later became a covid adviser to President Biden. He emailed Fauci before dawn on 4 March 2020. Within a few hours, Fauci wrote back: “you would assume that their [sic] would be substantial immunity post infection.”

That was before natural immunity started to be promoted by Republic politicians. In May 2020, Kentucky senator and physician Rand Paul asserted that since he already had the virus, he didn’t need to wear a mask. He has been the most vocal since, arguing that his immunity exempted him from vaccination. Wisconsin senator Ron Johnson and Kentucky representative Thomas Massie have also spoken out. And then there was President Trump, who tweeted last October that his recovery from covid-19 rendered him “immune” (which Twitter labelled “misleading and potentially harmful information”).

Another polarising factor may have been the Great Barrington declaration of October 2020, which argued for a less restrictive pandemic strategy that would help build herd immunity through natural infections in people at minimal risk.28 The John Snow memorandum, written in response (with signatories including Rochelle Walensky, who went on to head the CDC), stated “there is no evidence for lasting protective immunity to SARS-CoV-2 following natural infection.”29 That statement has a footnote to a study of people who had recovered from covid-19, showing that blood antibody levels wane over time.

More recently, the CDC made headlines with an observational study aiming to characterise the protection a vaccine might give to people with past infections. Comparing 246 Kentuckians who had subsequent reinfections with 492 controls who had not, the CDC concluded that those who were unvaccinated had more than twice the odds of reinfection.30 The study notes the limitation that the vaccinated are “possibly less likely to get tested. Therefore, the association of reinfection and lack of vaccination might be overestimated.” In announcing the study, Walensky stated: “If you have had covid-19 before, please still get vaccinated.”31

“If you listen to the language of our public health officials, they talk about the vaccinated and the unvaccinated,” Makary tells The BMJ. “If we want to be scientific, we should talk about the immune and the non-immune.” There’s a significant portion of the population, Makary says, who are saying, “‘Hey, wait, I’ve had [covid].’ And they’ve been blown off and dismissed.”

Different risk-benefit analysis?

For Frieden, vaccinating people who have already had covid-19 is, ultimately, the most responsible policy right now. “There’s no doubt that natural infection does provide significant immunity for many people, but we’re operating in an environment of imperfect information, and in that environment the precautionary principle applies—better safe than sorry.”

“In public health you are always dealing with some level of unknown,” says Sommer. “But the bottom line is you want to save lives, and you have to do what the present evidence, as weak as it is, suggests is the strongest defence with the least amount of harm.”

But others are less certain.

“If natural immunity is strongly protective, as the evidence to date suggests it is, then vaccinating people who have had covid-19 would seem to offer nothing or very little to benefit, logically leaving only harms—both the harms we already know about as well as those still unknown,” says Christine Stabell Benn, vaccinologist and professor in global health at the University of Southern Denmark. The CDC has acknowledged the small but serious risks of heart inflammation and blood clots after vaccination, especially in younger people. The real risk in vaccinating people who have had covid-19 “is of doing more harm than good,” she says.

A large study in the UK32 and another that surveyed people internationally33 found that people with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection experienced greater rates of side effects after vaccination. Among 2000 people who completed an online survey after vaccination, those with a history of covid-19 were 56% more likely to experience a severe side effect that required hospital care.33

Patrick Whelan, of UCLA, says the “sky high” antibodies after vaccination in people who were previously infected may have contributed to these systemic side effects. “Most people who were previously ill with covid-19 have antibodies against the spike protein. If they are subsequently vaccinated, those antibodies and the products of the vaccine can form what are called immune complexes,” he explains, which may get deposited in places like the joints, meninges, and even kidneys, creating symptoms.

Other studies suggest that a two dose regimen may be counterproductive.34 One found that in people with past infections, the first dose boosted T cells and antibodies but that the second dose seemed to indicate an “exhaustion,” and in some cases even a deletion, of T cells.34 “I’m not here to say that it’s harmful,” says Bertoletti, who coauthored the study, “but at the moment all the data are telling us that it doesn’t make any sense to give a second vaccination dose in the very short term to someone who was already infected. Their immune response is already very high.”

Despite the extensive global spread of the virus, the previously infected population “hasn’t been studied well as a group,” says Whelan. Memoli says he is also unaware of any studies examining the specific risks of vaccination for that group. Still, the US public health messaging has been firm and consistent: everyone should get a full vaccine dose.

“When the vaccine was rolled out the goal should have been to focus on people at risk, and that should still be the focus,” says Memoli. Such risk stratification may have complicated logistics, but it would also require more nuanced messaging. “A lot of public health people have this notion that if the public is told that there’s even the slightest bit of uncertainty about a vaccine, then they won’t get it,” he says. For Memoli, this reflects a bygone paternalism. “I always think it’s much better to be very clear and honest about what we do and don’t know, what the risks and benefits are, and allow people to make decisions for themselves.”

46% of Americans Want Fauci To Resign

46% of Americans Want Fauci To Resign

Nearly half the nation believes that COVID-19 czar Anthony Fauci lied about funding virus testing in China, and almost as many want him dumped from the post he’s held for 37 years.

In the latest Rasmussen Reports survey, 49% said he has not told the truth about U.S. funding for “gain-of-function” research.

When asked if he should be forced to resign as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 46% said yes and 40% said no.

The survey followed the recent release of a memo suggesting the United States supported and funded virus testing in China, where it is believed COVID-19 started or was developed.

It prompted a new round of calls, led by Sen. Rand Paul, to fire Fauci, beloved by his fans but despised by critics of mask and vaccine mandates.

Rasmussen said the release of the National Institutes of Health memo that appeared to contradict Fauci’s denial that federal funds had been used to fund controversial research in a Chinese laboratory cut into his credibility.

“The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that only 33% of likely U.S. voters believe Fauci has told the truth about U.S. government funding for gain-of-function virus research. That’s a decline from June, when 40% believed Fauci had told the truth,” the analysis said.

As with all polls about Fauci, partisanship plays a role. For example, he remains popular among Democrats. Only 24% believe he should be ousted.

But among Republicans, 67% want him forced to resign.

NYC, Police, Fire, Municipal Workers Protest


On the heels of arguably America’s largest vaccine mandate protest on Monday seeing New York City’s essential workers march across the Brooklyn Bridge, the story is coming to a head rapidly. 

Renewed protests hit NYC again Thursday as police, fire, and municipal city workers gathered by the thousands outside Mayor de Blasio’s Gracie Mansion. The city’s vaccine mandate, which takes effect this Friday at 5 p.m., covers 160,000 municipal employees, including cops and firefighters. According to the order, which went into effect only nine days earlier for all City workers, a first shot of the COVID vaccine by 5 p.m. Friday is mandated if they want to come to work the morning of November 1. Any city workers who do not comply with the mandate will be placed on unpaid leave.

Many are concerned that the city’s safety will be threatened by de Blasio’s ‘suspension without pay’ edict for those refusing to take the shot. 

The situation is fluid and playing out by the minute. Bloomberg is reporting the NYPD Has 10,000, or about one-third of uniformed officers, are unvaccinated as the mandate deadline approaches. NY Daily News is reporting The NYC Correction Department is faring the worst, with only 52% of its members vaccinated while only 68% of the FDNY has received at least one dose of the vaccine.

On Wednesday, October 20, De Blasio extended vaccine mandates to all public employees eliminating test out options.

Speaking at the protest, 16-year veteran NYC firefighter and president of the United Women’s Firefighters, Jackie Michelle-Martinez stated, “Nine days is not enough time for people who have mortgages, who have family, who have sick children, to make a life-changing decision.”

New York Uniformed Firefighters Association president Andrew Ansbro said, “On November 1st there’s gonna be a crisis in this city if thirty to forty percent of firefighters are sent home, we will have to close houses.”

7 Insane Facts About How U.S. Elections Are ‘Rigged’

voter fraud

 1. The DNC Controlled All Poll Watchers for 40 Years

Federal Judge Temporarily Bans Biden Admin From Firing Unvaccinated Employees

sad biden face

A federal judge for the district court in Washington, DC, issued a temporary restraining order on Thursday barring the Biden administration from firing both unvaccinated civilians and active-duty military members, Fox News reported.

The order comes after 20 plaintiffs sued the Biden administration for its handling of religious exemptions in its Chinese coronavirus vaccine mandate for federal employees. President Joe Biden issued an executive order on September 9 requiring all employees working for a federal contractor or subcontractor to get vaccinated against the Chinese coronavirus by November 24 to be considered “fully vaccinated” by a December 8, 2021, deadline. The mandate will also order private companies with more than 100 employees to implement required vaccinations or weekly testing for employees.

“None of the civilian employee plaintiffs will be subject to discipline while his or her request for a religious exception is pending,” District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly ordered, according to a Minute Order obtained by Fox News.

In her ruling, Kollar-Kotelly also ordered “active duty military plaintiffs, whose religious exception requests have been denied, will not be disciplined or separated during the pendency of their appeals,” the report states.

The Biden administration must file a supplemental notice by noon on Friday stating if they will agree to comply with the court’s ruling that no plaintiff will be fired or disciplined before the court rules in the case.

The administration has faced intense backlash since Biden announced the mandate, especially since he repeatedly promised to make vaccination voluntary. After much pressure, on Wednesday, the White House Coronavirus Response coordinator, Jeffrey Zients, claimed federal contractors “will not be required to immediate [sic] lay-off workers” and will allow time for “education, counseling and other measures before potentially ending employment,” Reuters reported.

In a statement obtained by Fox News from the plaintiff’s attorney, Michael Yoder, Yoder said the Biden administration has displayed “an unprecedented, cavalier attitude toward the rule of law and an utter ineptitude at basic constitutional contours.”

The statement continued:

This combination is dangerous to American liberty. Thankfully, our Constitution protects and secures the right to remain free from religious persecution and coercion. With this order, we are one step closer to putting the Biden administration back in its place by limiting government to its enumerated powers. It’s time citizens and courts said no to tyranny. The Constitution does not need to be rewritten, it needs to be reread.

Notably, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’s (R) administration announced on Thursday that it also filed a lawsuit against the Biden administration for its Chinese coronavirus vaccine mandates, suing both Biden and NASA.

This case is Church v. Biden, No. 1:21-cv-2815 in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

This is an amazing development from the DC District Court in the stand for OUR RIGHTS against the unconstitutional vaccine mandates.


Who Are The 'Disinformation' Enemies of Truth?

The only way to know who your enemy is in the age of disinformation is to follow the money.

China's Wuhan laboratory is owned by GlaxoSmithKline which owns Pfizer the company that makes the vaccines. Dr. Fauci funded the research at the Wuhan lab through NIH.  GlaxoSmithKline is managed by the Private Equity finance division of Black Rock which manages the finances of Open Foundation Group for George Soros which manages the French Accent Group.  Soros owns the German company that built the Wuhan laboratory which was bought by the German Alliance which has Vanguard as a shareholder. Black Rock, Vanguard and Alliance control the central banks and also have a large stake in Microsoft where Bill Gates is the Chairman. Bill Gates is a shareholder of Pfizer and BioNTech and a sponsor of the World Health Organization. 

Over the past two decades, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has donated “a bit more than $10 billion” into mainly three groups: the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization, the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, and the Global Polio Eradication Initiative.

Disinformation enemies of truth

Vaccinated Case Rates Are Higher Than Unvaccinated in the UK

The UK weekly Covid-19 surveillance reports suddenly stopped publishing this chart comparing case rates between vaccinated and unvaccinated, so I made it for them from data in the last 4 reports. How should these data be interpreted?

Notice how it's "cases" now. Is there a way to show how many in each age group with the same criteria, ended up in hospital because of Covid-19 (not "with" where someone is injured goes for treatment and tests positive and is then counted as an unvaccinated hospital case) and deaths? That would be interesting.

Here is the report

Billionaires Fund New Company to Fight For Monopoly of Truth 'Disinformation'

It’s Happening, And Soros And The Libs Aren’t Happy - The Dan Bongino Show

The left is furious, and George Soros and the cat lady are leading the effort to strike back. In this episode, I address their latest plot. We also address Florida’s resurgence and a parent who refuses to be held captive by school board tyranny.  Here is the new venture

fake liberal news

Creative Vaccine Protest in France For Companies That Mandate Vaccines

People in France are going inside stores that force vaccine passports, filling up shopping carts, and leaving them at checkout before leaving. 

shopping cart protest France

Florida Now Has the Lowest Covid Case Rate in USA

Florida has the lowest Covid case rate in the U.S.and has filed another lawsuit against the Biden Administration. 

Hospitals Should Hire Nurses with Natural Immunity—Not Fire Them

“Since the Athenian plague in 430 B.C… we have known about natural immunity. So it’s strange that suddenly people are questioning that,” says Dr. Martin Kulldorff.

Nurses and caregivers who have recovered from a COVID-19 infection have “stronger, longer-lasting immunity” than vaccinated individuals who have not been infected before, Dr. Kulldorff says, making these nurses and caregivers actually the “least likely to infect the residents.”

Instead of firing them if they refuse to take the vaccine, hospitals and nursing homes should do the exact opposite: They should actively hire people with natural immunity and assign these individuals to the wards with especially vulnerable patients,” he argues.

Dr. Kulldorff is a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and a biostatistician and epidemiologist at the Brigham and Women's Hospital. He is also one of the co-authors of the Great Barrington Declaration. We discuss the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines, the politicization of science, and the Biden administration’s recent push to mandate vaccines for children.

Dr Martin Kulldorff

Dan Bongino's Goes On Strike Over Cumulus Media's Vaccine Mandate

Dan Bongino is taking a break from his radio show and is off the air for at least the rest of this week in the midst of a public feud over the Vaccine mandate imposed by Cumulus Media, the radio giant that distributes his show. 

Several affiliates that play The Dan Bongino Show told the radio broadcasting industry trade magazine Radio Ink that Bongino’s program has been put on “best of” mode for the rest of this week.

The show, which occupies the noon to 3 p.m. time slot on Cumulus Media’s influential radio network Westwood One, also did not air on Tuesday, according to Radio Ink.

Zachary Petrizzo, an investigative reporter with Salon, tweeted Wednesday morning that he received information Bongino is currently on “vacation” from his radio hosting duties with Cumulus. 

Bongino’s departure from the air follows a public clash over the Covid-19 vaccine mandate imposed by Cumulus Media CEO Mary Berner in September. Several of the company’s radio hosts have already quit or been fired over the rule, which was geared toward an October 11 return to the office. Bongino himself has been fully vaccinated on the advice of his doctors as he is battling Hodgkin’s lymphoma, his team said. However he believes vaccine mandates are “unethical” and “immoral.” He threatened to quit his job earlier this month if Cumulus Media didn’t shift on the mandate. 

“Cumulus is going to have to make a decision with me—if they want to continue this partnership or they don’t,” Bongino told listeners in a recent program. “It’s really unfortunate that people with a lower profile than me, who don’t have 300-plus stations, have been summarily either shown the door or been put in really untenable circumstances because they simply want to make a medical decision by themselves.”

Governor of New Jersey Phil Murphy Crooked Campaign Lies

Project Veritas exposes Phil Murphy’s crooked campaign. A must watch.

Phil Murphy Campaign

Associated Press Fake Story & Lies About Project Veritas

DEFAMATION BY IMPLICATION: The Associated Press 'Strawmans' Project Veritas

RETRACTO 349: Daily Beast's Will Sommer RETRACTS headline ‘Judge Rules Veritas is Political Spying’

Dr. Pierre Kory Treated 200 Members of Congress with Ivermectin

Dr. Pierre Kory treated 200 members of Congress with Ivermectin

Dr Pierre Kory

Don't Trust The Vaccine Hypocrisy of Biden & Democrats

Compilation of public statements by Democratic leaders. It's science ... not politics!

What's is REALLY in the Coivd 19 Vaccines

Dr. Ardis and Dr. Carrie Madej learn from Karen Kingston, what's REALLY in the C19 vaccines!

Self-assembly nanotechnology webs called Teslaphoresis of Carbon Nanotubes

what is in the vaccines

Israeli Physicians, Scientists Advise FDA of ‘Severe Concerns’ Regarding Reliability and Legality of Official Israeli COVID Vaccine Data

Israel doctors to FDA

An independent Israeli group of physicians, lawyers, scientists, and researchers called the Professional Ethics Front today advised the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regarding the upcoming FDA discussion on administering COVID-19 vaccines to children aged 5-11, expressing “severe concerns” regarding the reliability and legality of official Israeli COVID vaccine data.

“We are aware that the state of Israel is perceived as ‘the world laboratory’ regarding the safety and efficacy of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, as reflected by statements made by Dr. Albert Bourla, Dr. Anthony Fauci, and other senior figures in leading health authorities throughout the world,” the letter reads. “It is therefore our understanding that the data and information coming from Israel play a crucial role in critical decision-making processes in regards to COVID-19 vaccination policies. We thus see it of utmost importance to convey a message of warning and raise our major concerns regarding potential flaws in the reliability of the Israeli data with respect to the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, as well as many significant legal and ethical violations that accompany the data collection processes.”

The letter elaborates: “We believe that the significant failures underlying the Israeli database, which have been brought to our attention by numerous testimonies, impair its reliability and legality to such an extent that it should not be used for making any critical decisions regarding the COVID-19 vaccines.”

America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) spoke to Haifa and Reichman Universities Health and Risk Communication lecturer Dr. Yaffa Shir Raz, one of the letter’s authors, about their findings and conclusions:

This document briefly outlines the main failures that lead to this unfortunate, albeit inevitable, conclusion,” the notice reads. “We emphasize that we can expand and clarify further, as well as provide references, in relation to each of the failures described below:

“1. Lack of a Public and Transparent Adverse Events Reporting System: The first prerequisite for granting a permit for use of any new medicinal preparation is the setup of adverse events (AEs) collection systems that would allow appropriate management of risks and generation of alarm signals. All the more so when it concerns a mass vaccination campaign of a first-in-human use of an experimental preparation to the citizens of an entire country, which serves as a global model. Despite the advanced technological systems available to the Israeli HMOs, and contrary to common standards in Western countries, there exists no proper and transparent AEs reporting system in Israel, such as the US VAERS system, that is accessible to the public, and thus no appropriate tracking of AEs occurring after the administration of the COVID-19 vaccine.

“Healthcare professionals or citizens in Israel, who wish to submit reports of AEs following vaccination, are unable to do so. As such, there is no possibility for either of these populations to also search through the data, rendering impossible the examination of the reported AEs by other citizens, physicians and independent researchers. Instead, there is only an online AEs reporting form available on the MOH’s website. This form, however, was for many months not useful, since it did not allow the inclusion of personal contact information. The free text field intended to describe the AEs comprised a limited number of characters and the symptoms list available to choose from was limited as well and included only mild AEs terms.

“A petition to the Israeli Supreme Court of Justice has led the Ministry of Health (MOH) to implement the above-mentioned necessary improvements to the form. Unfortunately, the modification of the form was made very late, after the majority of the adult population had already been vaccinated. Furthermore, since the report is not publicized in a transparent manner, the MOH is the only recipient and thus the sole owner of the data and the decision-making authority on the utilization and distribution of it.

“Moreover, no tracking and monitoring of even the most sensitive populations, such as pregnant women and the elderly, is taking place. For example, as part of the ‘National Senior Population Protection from the COVID-19 Program’ in Israel, a reporting system was activated in April 2020, which presented detailed reports almost daily on COVID-19 eruptions, on hospitalizations and on mortality in nursing homes. However, on December 29th, 2020, the very day the vaccination campaign commenced in nursing homes, the publication of these reports was abruptly discontinued, and has never been resumed since.

“2. Severe Impairments in Healthcare Professionals’ Adverse Events Reporting System: We reveal that physicians and medical teams in Israel encounter great obstacles when attempting to report AEs following Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccination to the MOH. We have testimonies of physicians, who attest to the complexity of filling the AEs reports to the MOH, claiming that reporting is almost impractical in the incredibly stressful working conditions of medical teams in Israel during this period. As a result of these tremendous difficulties, there is an immense underreporting of AEs by healthcare professionals in Israel, and AEs are only rarely reported in exceptional cases. The physicians’ testimonies that we have obtained also show that reported AEs are not openly publicized, or made available to the healthcare professionals themselves.

“Even more disturbing is the fact that the few reports, which the Israeli MOH does publicize about the AEs observed after receiving the Pfizer-BIONtech COVID-19 vaccine, are not consistent with the testimonies of physicians regarding severe adverse events (SAEs) that they themselves have reported to the MOH. Thus, for example, in a discussion before the Advisory Committee of the FDA on September 17th, 2021, the head of the Israeli Health Services, Dr. Alroy-Preis, claimed that only one case of myocarditis was observed after the 3rd vaccine dose out of three million people who received the 3rd vaccine dose in Israel. This claim does not reconcile with research findings from all over the world, including findings from Israel, that were published in the medical literature, according to which the rate of myocarditis observed after receiving the Pfizer-BioNtech COVID-19 vaccine stands at 1:3,000-6,000. The claim of Dr. Alroy-Preis also stands in contrast to reports given by a handful of brave Israeli doctors about cases of myocarditis and other SAEs observed in close proximity to the Pfizer-BioNtech COVID-19 vaccine.

“One of these physicians, Dr. Yoav Yehezkelli, who was among the founders of the Israeli Outbreak Management Team, wrote on his Facebook page that he personally treated in his clinic a 17-year-old boy, who suffered from myocarditis several days after the 3rd vaccine dose, and he knows of two additional cases among the boy’s classmates. Dr. Yoav Yehezkelli added that he reported the myocarditis case that he treated (and additional SAEs cases) to the MOH through the online reporting system, as well as via personal reports to MOH officials, but his reports were quickly dismissed as having no link to the vaccine, without thorough examination of the cases. Dr. Yehezkelli also mentioned that he encountered other patients in his clinic, who were hospitalized after suffering from AEs in close proximity to receiving Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines, and the hospital supposedly failed to report said AEs to the MOH. We have affidavits from nine other physicians, who have also treated cases of myocarditis or know of such cases, but have abandoned their attempts at reporting to the MOH having tackled immense difficulty or, alternatively, reported to the MOH and did not get any response. It is statistically improbable that a small cohort of physicians should witness these many COVID-19 vaccine injuries if Dr. Alroy-Preis’s claim was accurate.

“3. Data Distortion: Recently, two serious incidents in which data presented by the MOH was distorted have been revealed.

“The first one was the deletion of thousands of citizens’ responses to a post by the MOH. In response to an MOH post that read ‘Let’s talk about the adverse events’, and claimed that the vaccine is completely safe and that SAEs are extremely rare, tens of thousands of responses from the public were posted, with many reporting AEs, including SAEs, which they suffered after the vaccine. But instead of examining the responses and addressing them, about half of them were deleted.

“The second event occurred about two weeks ago. Based on MOH dashboard data, an analysis conducted by members of the Israeli Public Emergency Council for the Corona Crisis (PECC) demonstrated that the Pfizer-BioNtech COVID-19 3rd vaccine dose effectiveness is much lower than that claimed in the New England journal of Medicine study presented by Dr. Sharon Alroy-Preis to the FDA panel on September 17th, 2021. Within 24 hours of the release of the PECC analysis, the relevant dashboard data history was completely re-written. The PECC released screenshots of both the original and “rectified” data.

“4. Legal and Ethical Violations in Data Collection Processes: Not only is the data coming from Israel regarding the safety and efficacy of the PfizerBioNtech COVID-19 vaccine apparently unreliable, but also the collection method is controversial, and claimed to be neither legal nor ethical. The Pfizer-BioNtech COVID-19 vaccines are administered to the Israeli population without their informed consent, which is required by the GCP chapter of IHC-6 and carried out in other countries. This is a clear violation of the Nuremberg Code Rules, the Patient’s Bill of Rights, and the Israeli MOH directives for clinical trials on humans. Moreover, the Israeli citizens are under tremendous pressure to get vaccinated, almost to the point of coercion.

“Should the ‘Outbreak Management Team’ decide on a 3rd dose of the vaccine to the immunocompromised patients, it is not clear how many we can vaccinate, and it requires approval of the Helsinki committee (medical trial approval committee) and Pfizer’s approval. We are committed to Pfizer, to vaccinate only by the vaccination regimen established by them”. This is a statement made by Prof. Hezi Levi, former CEO of the Israeli MOH on July 5th, 2021. The evident conclusion is that the 3rd vaccine dose operation is an experiment requiring approval of the Helsinki Committee in charge of approving human medical experiments in Israel. Such an approval has never been issued. Moreover, the 3rd vaccine dose operation refers only to the immunocompromised population, and thus is even more unethical in healthy individuals, especially in young healthy individuals, shown to be at a higher risk for myocarditis.

“We are deeply concerned with the failure of the Vaccine Safety Committee (VSC) to fulfill its designated role. The VSC is responsible in Israel for vaccine safety and the official arm designated to monitor and collect safety data. It has not issued a single position paper on its behalf or raised a single red flag to raise wareness/bring attention to SAE cases and has never gathered in full assembly. Additionally, one of the public representative, who is a pediatrician (allergist, immunologist), never knew that he was appointed and did not attend any of the meetings, even when they did take place.”

The Israeli Professional Ethics Front concludes its notice to the FDA: “In accordance with the accepted perception established after World War II, the findings of experiments obtained in illegal and immoral ways should not be relied upon. We believe that the same rules should apply to the findings of the current experiment in Israel, since these findings were obtained through significant legal and ethical infringements. Our conclusion is further reinforced by the significant doubts about the reliability of the data reported by Israel, as detailed above, and the consequent major concern that their use might be misleading and thus disrupt the decision-making processes pertaining to the Pfizer-BioNtech COVID-19 vaccines.

“In the Book of Leviticus, it is said ‘Do not stand idly by while your neighbor’s blood is shed.’ In the spirit of those words, we implore the committee to take into consideration our urgent warnings and adopt utmost precaution when referring to the Israeli data concerning the safety and efficacy of the Pfizer-BioNtech COVID-19 vaccines.”

Doctor With Natural Immunity Fired For Fefusing Vaccine & Using Ivermectin

St. Louis ICU physician - who fought the COVID-19 pandemic on the front lines for 18 months - is out of a job after refusing to get the COVID-19 vaccine.

A local ICU physician – who fought the Covid pandemic on the front lines for 18 months – is out of a job after refusing to get the vaccine.

Dr. Mollie James said she was employed at two health systems in the Midwest, including in St. Louis, for much of the pandemic. She was also splitting her time between local hospitals and one in New York. 

James has worked as a trauma and acute care surgeon for 11 years, four of which were spent in St. Louis. 

“When the pandemic hit I just felt a calling to go to New York when they called for volunteers,” she said. “So I went there in April of 2020 and I liked being in the midst of it. My purpose for going was to help them out, but also to see what they were doing in real time and what was the most effective for patients so I could bring that back to the community.” 

For most of the last year and a half, James said she traveled between New York and St. Louis, working with critical ICU patients infected with COVID-19 in multiple hospitals. 

“I was scared, so I have a lot of empathy for the people who live in fear, because we didn’t know,” she said. “About that time nurses were dying. Doctors were dying. And so I didn’t know what we were getting into.” 

James said she tested positive for Covid in March of 2020, about a month before volunteering to go to New York. Still, she said she was nervous.  “We had freezer trucks serving as morgues outside my hospital so it was a very real reminder to wear all of the personal protective gear,” she said. 

During her time treating patients at the height of the pandemic, James said one of the first big improvements in treatment she witnessed was the addition of steroids and blood thinners to treatment protocols. 

In December of 2020, James said the Senate testimony of Dr. Pierre Kory, a fellow ICU physician, caught her eye. 

“He started talking about Ivermectin,” she said. “At the time, I wasn’t familiar with that medication, so I started looking into it and the dosing protocols and the side effects and the downsides to it. We started slowly using it in a few patients, then the pandemic numbers went down and I didn’t really see a big difference at that time.” 

When a surge of Covid cases hit southwest Missouri, James said she started doing additional research on the drug and the concept of early outpatient treatment. 

“There’s an entire protocol and Ivermectin is a key part of it.  We use blood thinners and different vitamins along with a stronger steroids than most people use, called Methylprednisolone. We combine that with Ivermectin and that combination seems to be extremely effective.” 

“I had two patient successes at the hospital that was offering it and they pulled it off the shelf a week later,” James said. “I was told it wasn’t approved by the COVID committee so doctors who were not involved in the patient’s care, my patient’s care, were making decisions about what I could use.” 

Dr. Clay Dunagan, the head of the St. Louis Metropolitan Pandemic Task Force, looked into James’ claims but said there are better treatment options available.  “It’s conceivable that Ivermectin has some impact early in the disease but it’s not really something we should be using. We have other drugs that are more effective,” he said. 

Dunagan said early data shows Ivermectin doesn’t make much of a difference and he believes Remdesivir, an anti-viral drug, along with other steroids benefit patients more. 

James said the decision should be between a patient and their doctor. 

“When I was able to properly dose and use Ivermectin in an ICU patient, I saw the fastest turnaround of any patient out of probably a couple thousand that I’ve treated,” James said. 

“When you have administrators telling physicians what medications they can prescribe, or how to counsel patients regarding interventions or telling them not to do something they believe is in the patient’s best interest, I think doctors have an obligation to leave those situations.” 

Because James recovered from COVID-19, she believes her natural immunity outweighs any medical need for a vaccine. She said she doesn’t actively encourage her patients to get vaccinated, but did add she believes it’s a decision that should ultimately be left up to a patient and their doctor. 

James admits her position on the use of Ivermectin and vaccination status places her in the minority of healthcare workers. Still, she said she’s speaking out based on the tragedy she’s witnessed firsthand.

“I think there are a lot of people living in fear, they’ve been sold fear for a long time. They don’t need to be afraid, they just need to be informed,” James said. “They need to arm themselves with the knowledge and potentially the medications so they know what to do and get back to life.” 

James is in private practice now, seeing patients virtually from across the country. She said she will prescribe several medications, including Ivermectin, to patients who have tested positive. 

“Everyone is a candidate for early treatment.  I believe its 85 percent effective in keeping people out of the hospital.”

She adds she’s run into roadblocks at pharmacies, with pharmacists unwilling to fill prescriptions for Ivermectin. Insurance companies don’t cover it either, leaving patients to pay out-of-pocket.

Attorney General Asked If Fauci Will Be Investigated For Lying To Congress

Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) asked Attorney General Merrick Garland during a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Thursday if they would investigate Dr. Fauci for potentially lying to Congress.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis To Ban Vaccine Mandates

DeSantis calls special session to ban Vaccine mandates

Vaccine Interferes With Your Body’s Innate Immune System After Infection

natural immune system

The British government admitted today, in its newest vaccine surveillance report, that:

“N antibody levels appear to be lower in people who acquire infection following two doses of vaccination.”

What’s this mean? Several things, all bad. We know the vaccines do not stop infection or transmission of the virus (in fact, the report shows elsewhere that vaccinated adults are now being infected at much HIGHER rates than the unvaccinated).

What the British are saying is they are now finding the vaccine interferes with your body’s innate ability after infection to produce antibodies against not just the spike protein but other pieces of the virus. Specifically, vaccinated people don’t seem to be producing antibodies to the nucleocapsid protein, the shell of the virus, which are a crucial part of the response in unvaccinated people.

This means vaccinated people will be far more vulnerable to mutations in the spike protein EVEN AFTER THEY HAVE BEEN INFECTED AND RECOVERED ONCE (or more than once, probably).

It also means the virus is likely to select for mutations that go in exactly that direction, because those will essentially give it an enormous vulnerable population to infect. And it probably is still more evidence the vaccines may interfere with the development of robust long-term immunity post-infection.

Aside from that, everything is fine.

UK Covid Vaccine Surveillance Report

How To Pre Order "Truth Social" iPhone App Before It Launches

Truth Social Pre-Order

Trump announces new TRUTH social network and media group to fight ‘tyranny of Big Tech’

TRUTH Social is America’s “Big Tent” social media platform that encourages an open, free, and honest global conversation without discriminating against political ideology.

Truth Social Screen Shots

Shares of Trump-linked SPAC close up 350% following news of social media deal. The stock of SPAC company Digital World Acquisition Corp. skyrocketed on extremely heavy trading volume after news of a merger that would launch former President Donald Trump’s planned social media platform.  

Follow the stock on Reddit $DWAC

Trump Media & Technology Group and Digital World Acquisition Corp. (NASDAQ: DWAC) have entered into a definitive merger agreement, providing for a business combination that will result in Trump Media & Technology Group becoming a publicly listed company, subject to regulatory and stockholder approval.  The transaction values Trump Media & Technology Group at an initial enterprise value of $875 Million, with a potential additional earnout of $825 Million in additional shares (at the valuation they are granted) for a cumulative valuation of up to $1.7 Billion depending on the performance of the stock price post-business combination. Trump Media & Technology Group’s growth plans initially will be funded by DWAC’s cash in trust of $293 Million (assuming no redemptions).

Trump Media & Technology Group's mission is to create a rival to the liberal media consortium and fight back against the "Big Tech” companies of Silicon Valley, which have used their unilateral power to silence opposing voices in America.

Trump Media & Technology Group (“TMTG”) will soon be launching a social network, named "TRUTH Social."  TRUTH Social is now available for Pre-Order in the Apple App store.  TRUTH Social plans to begin its Beta Launch for invited guests in November 2021.  A nationwide rollout is expected in the first quarter of 2022.  Those who are interested in joining TRUTH Social may now visit to sign up for the invite list.  

President Donald J. Trump, the Chairman of TMTG, stated, “I created TRUTH Social and TMTG to stand up to the tyranny of Big Tech. We live in a world where the Taliban has a huge presence on Twitter, yet your favorite American President has been silenced. This is unacceptable. I am excited to send out my first TRUTH on TRUTH Social very soon. TMTG was founded with a mission to give a voice to all. I'm excited to soon begin sharing my thoughts on TRUTH Social and to fight back against Big Tech. Everyone asks me why doesn’t someone stand up to Big Tech? Well, we will be soon!”

Patrick F. Orlando, Chairman/CEO of DWAC, stated, "Digital World was formed to create public shareholder value and we believe that TMTG is one of the most promising business combination partners to fulfill that purpose.  DWAC currently has $293 Million in trust, assuming minimal redemptions, which can fuel TMTG’s scale up, including to provide world class leading technology services to build strong and secure social networks and diverse media offerings. Given the total addressable market and President Trump’s large following, we believe the TMTG opportunity has the potential to create significant shareholder value.”

Additionally, TMTG intends to launch a subscription video on demand service (TMTG+). TMTG+ will feature 'non-woke' entertainment programming, news, podcasts, and more.  TMTG has named Scott St. John as the leader of TMTG+ Corporate Operations.  Scott St. John is the Executive Producer of “Deal or No Deal’ and “America’s Got Talent” and has produced over 1,000 hours of Network and Cable TV.

Please visit TMTG’s corporate website at for a Company Overview, and a video tour of TRUTH Social. 

NIH States EcoHealth Alliance Violated Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant AI110964


This is Fauci throwing Peter Daszak under the bus, in case that is not clear to you.  I predict that this is going to get really ugly now.

- Fauci funded gain-of-function research
- Wuhan lab was doing GOF research
- COVID came out of Wuhan lab
- CCP covered it up 
- Fauci lied to congress

Fauci committed perjury. 

“Dr Death” must face a war crimes tribunal immediately. NIH corrects untruthful assertions by NIH Director Collins and NIAID Director Fauci that NIH had not funded gain-of-function research in Wuhan.

NIH states that EcoHealth Alliance violated Terms and Conditions of NIH grant AI110964.

1,300 COVID vaccine-related injury claims are now pending before an obscure government tribunal

tribunal vs court
If you want to follow these cases and others please subscribe to this Subreddit "Tribunals" (Just Banned) 

Federal tribunals in the United States are those tribunals established by the federal government of the United States for the purpose of resolving disputes involving or arising under federal laws, including questions about the constitutionality of such laws.

Tribunals are often confused with courts. Tribunals are a part of the administrative system whereas courts, in general, are the creation of the judiciary which is entirely a separate organ. Both the courts and tribunals operate independently of each other. Although their objectives are the same yet there are major differences that establish them as separate bodies.

Tribunals are established under administrative law, which is an offshoot of decentralization of government authorities. Decentralization has resulted in the increased number of departments that have maximized the responsibility of government. Hence, these departments are given the authority to look after their disputes independently without any interference of courts except when the decisions are challenged in their legality.

Just like any court, a tribunal has a permanent establishment. There’s a bench of adjudicators who are responsible to pronounce a just and fair decision in favor of the aggrieved party. As compared to a court, the proceedings of a tribunal are less formal and speedy. The courts are expected to be rigid in their functions because they’re directed to do so as per the rules and code of conduct. Their performance is reported to the higher courts that initiate misconduct proceedings in absence of obedience to proper conduct. In tribunals, the adjudicators are selected from the organization or the department itself. The department makes its own sets of rules and they’re relatively flexible and informal.

The tribunal decisions are binding upon the parties. However, they’re appealable or challengeable in the court, provided the law under which the tribunal is established provides for the opportunity of appeal to the higher courts.

Reuters Story

As the Biden administration puts the final touches on an emergency COVID-19 vaccine mandate for companies with 100 or more employees, a crucial piece seems to be missing for the unlucky few who experience serious side effects: meaningful legal recourse.

More than 1,300 COVID vaccine-related injury claims are now pending before an obscure government tribunal, which to date has decided only two such cases, one involving swelling of the tongue and throat following the jab, the other alleging long-lasting, severe shoulder pain.

In both instances, the government, which requires claimants to prove their injuries are “the direct result” of a COVID-19 vaccine, denied compensation.

It’s a steep burden of proof. Lawyers tell me the vaccine is so new that there’s virtually no definitive research on injury causation to cite.  THIS IS A BLATANT LIE BY REUTERS. 

All you have to do is look at the Vaers database and see these stories about side effects

Indeed, the overwhelming majority of all litigants under what's known as the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program have not succeeded. According to program data, 29 claims have been paid for injuries stemming from other vaccines since the tribunal’s inception in 2010. (Ten additional claims won approval but no compensation.) The other 455 claims – 92% – were denied or otherwise deemed ineligible for review.

For those who prevailed, the median award was $5,677, according to my calculations, spanning from a low of $31 to a high of $2.3 million, for a person who contracted Guillain-Barre Syndrome after receiving the H1N1 influenza vaccine.

There is no provision for damages based on pain and suffering.

For people like Jessica McFadden, who said she developed life-threatening blood clots after receiving Johnson & Johnson’s COVID-19 vaccine in April, legal options are unclear. She's not optimistic about her odds of recovering her losses, and it's certain she won't be able to recover any pain and suffering damages under the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program.

McFadden, 44, said she was previously healthy and needed two emergency surgeries to remove massive clots in her lungs, heart and left leg. She spent nine days in the hospital, racking up $489,153 in medical bills, she said. Her insurance will cover most, but not all of the tab, she said, and she estimates she'll pay up to $7,000 out of pocket.

She emailed me a photo of extracted clots, which she said were removed during an agonizing procedure performed while she was conscious. They are thick and ropy, like nightcrawlers on a surgical tray.

McFadden, who said she has returned to work but is still taking blood thinners, has not spoken publicly of her ordeal until now. “I’m not an anti-vaxxer. I understand the need for the vaccine,” she said. “I was just trying to do the right thing.”

To be clear, an experience like McFadden described is extremely rare. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in May said that out of 8.7 million people who had gotten the J&J jab, only 28 suffered the complication known as thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome. Per the CDC, there is a "plausible causal association" between the vaccine and the blood clots.

Johnson & Johnson in a statement said, “The safety and well-being of the people who use our products is our number one priority.”

To McFadden, the issue is not that COVID-19 vaccines are bad or that no one should get them. Rather, she said, what’s important is how we care for people “when something catastrophic happens” as a result, especially now that vaccine mandates are becoming so widespread.

For decades, vaccine makers have been shielded from product liability lawsuits thanks to the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. The law was passed after pharmaceutical companies were hit with lawsuits over a brain injury known as pertussis vaccine encephalopathy and threatened to quit making the DPT (diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus) vaccine altogether.

Under the 1986 law, people who claim to have been injured by DPT, hepatitis, influenza and other common shots bring their cases in a special, no-fault tribunal, the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, known colloquially as “vaccine court.” Payouts (including attorneys’ fees) are funded by a 75-cent tax per vaccine.

The forum is far from perfect, but over the years, it has awarded more than $4 billion to injured claimants.

But that’s not where the COVID-19 vaccine injury cases are being decided.

In March 2020, then-Health and Human Services secretary Alex Azar issued a declaration under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act of 2005 providing liability immunity for medical countermeasures related to the novel coronavirus. Injury claims would be handled by the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program, which is run by the Health Resources and Services Administration and is geared toward public health emergencies.

Coverage for claimants is limited: Lost wages up to $50,000 a year and out-of-pocket medical expenses. If the person died,

his or her next-of-kin can seek death benefits up to $370,376.

A spokeswoman for HRSA declined my request for an interview but explained in an email how the process works.

First, the person claiming an injury submits a request for a benefits form and relevant medical records. For COVID-19 vaccine injuries, the claims already include a veritable Merck Manual of maladies, everything from dizziness to deafness to death, according to HRSA data.

The form is “reviewed by CICP medical staff,” who decide whether the requester is eligible for program benefits.

If requesters don’t like the decision, they can ask for reconsideration by “a qualified panel, independent of the program.” The panel makes a recommendation to the associate administrator of the Health Systems Bureau of HRSA, whose decision on the payout is final.

You might notice a few things are missing, like an independent judge, a chance to present one's case in person, damages for pain and suffering and the right to appeal beyond the agency.

Vaccine court has all these features. CICP has none.

But this is where the COVID-19 vaccine cases are relegated, at least for now. Per the steps laid out in the 1986 vaccine law, for the COVID-19 vaccine to move to vaccine court, the CDC must first recommend the shots for routine administration to children. Then Congress must pass a law adding the 75-cent tax on each COVID-19 vaccine given, and the Secretary of Health and Human Services must move the vaccines to the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.

All of this could take years.

Legislation is pending in Congress that would expedite the process (as well as upping vaccine court damages, extending the statute of limitations from three years to five and adding more special masters), but it has yet to gain traction.

Spokespeople for the bill’s sponsors in the House of Representatives – Texas Democrat Lloyd Doggett, and Republicans Fred Upton of Michigan and Mike Kelly of Pennsylvania – did not respond to requests for comment.

In the meantime, people like McFadden face a strict one-year deadline from the date of vaccination to file a claim with the CICP. But it’s not clear if filing in the CICP would preclude her from later moving her case to vaccine court, should that become an option.

She told me that she's waiting until early next year to decide how to proceed.

Popular Posts (Last 7 Days)


5G Activist ADE Advertising Air Quality Airlines Alchohol Alex Berenson Allergic Angry Moms Antibody Antitrust Apple Apps Arizona Aspirin Astra Zeneca Australia Bankruptcy Banks Banned Bars BBB Beaches Bell's Palsy Ben Shapiro Biden Big Pharma Big Tech Bill Gates BioNTech BitChute Black Rock Blackmail Blood Clots Booster Brave Brownstone Institute Bryan Ardis Business California Canada Cancer Candace Owens Cares Act CDC Censorship Chart ChatGPT Chicago Children China Class Action Clinical Trials Closures CNN Comirnaty Conspiracy Contact Tracing Corruption COVAX Cover Up Crimes Against Humanity Cult Cuomo Dan Bongino DARPA Data David Martin Deaths DeSantis Diabetes Died Suddenly Disinformation Doctor Reiner Doctors DOJ Dominion Dr Michael Yeadon Dr Reiner Dr Shiva Dr Zelenko Drugs Durability DWAC ECDC Education Election Elon Musk Email Enforcement Europe Exemptions Extortion Facebook Fact Checkers Fake Laws Fake News Fake Tests Fake Vaccine False Positive Famotidine Fauci FBI FDA Fear Mongering Federal Reserve Feds Fines Florida Flu Flu Shots Fluvoxamine Fox France Fraud Free Speech Freedom FTC Gain of Function Research Gavin Newsom Geert Vanden Bossche Genome George Soros Germany Glenn Beck Globalism Google Government Guillain-Barré Halloween Harvard Health Health Department Healthcare Heart Herd Immunity Hero HHS Hospitals How To Humor Hydroxychloroquine Hypocrisy Immune System India Injured Insurance Investment IRS Israel Italy Ivermectin J&J Japan Jeff Bezos Jim Jordan Jobs Joe Rogan Judy Mikovits LA County Larry Elder Lawsuits Leadership Let Them Breathe Lies Loans Local Laws Lockdown Long Covid Los Angeles Mandates Map Masks Mass Hypnosis Media Medicaid Melatonin Mental Health Michigan Microsoft Minnesota Moderna Money Montana mRNA Mutation Myocarditis Nanoscience Nashville Natural Immunity NBA New Jersey New Media New York New Zealand Nextstrain NFL NIH Nursing Homes NY NY Post Ohio Omicron Omricon Opinion Opposing View Oppression Outdoors Parks Passport Patents PCR Pennsylvania Pericarditis Peter McCullough Pfizer Phishing Physicians Declaration Placebo Plandemic Pneumonia Police Politics Poll Pollution PPP Prevention Pro Choice Project Veritas Protest Racism Rand Paul Real Estate Refuse Regeneron Relief Checks Remdesirvir Restaurants Restraining Order Robert Kennedy Robert Malone Ron Johnson Rudy Giuliani Rumble Russia Safegraph SBA Scams Schools Science Scott Gottlieb Senate Seniors Side Effects Social Distancing South Korea Spain Sports Stadiums Stakeholder Capitalism Stay at Home Sterilization Steve Kirsch Study Substance Abuse Surveillance Sweden Swine Flu Symptoms T Cells Taxes Teachers Technology Teslaphoresis Testing Texas Tips Tom Cotton Tony Bobulinski Transmission Treatment Tribunals Trojan Horse Trump TruthSocial Tucker Carlson Twitter Tyranny UK Unemployment United Nations Unity Project Vaccine VAERS Video Vietnam Vitamin D War Warren Buffett Washington WEF Whistleblower WHO Wisconsin Women Workers Comp Wuhan Zinc